Ole Gunnar Solskjær | 2021/22 Discussion

[AltiUn]

This is the kind of hyperbole that causes perfectly legitimate debates about Ole and the team's coaching to deteriorate into shouting matches. Can you tone it down please?

Is our current coaching and style of play a little too reliant on the talent and brilliance of individual players? Yes, I think so. But you don't get to second in the league with objectively bad coaching, and there are plenty of examples that show the team has been coached well to do the following:
- Play with a specific style in most games (building from the back, using overlapping fullbacks to create overloads in wide areas, and committing defenders in one-on-one duels to create space);
- Play intricate, one-touch passing to break down a low block (as was seen with Lingard's goal today and multiple goals last season);
- Improve attaching and defending set pieces (only four games in, you can already see a massive difference in both boxes);
- Adapt to games against superior opposition to play highly effective counter-attacking football (see our last three victories against City, and our FA Cup victory against Liverpool last season).

There are obvious weaknesses. We are vulnerable to counter-attacks due to structural issues in midfield, and we do not have a coordinated system of pressing to win the ball back quickly after losing it. We also suffer against low blocks sometimes because of the aforementioned style that encourages one-on-one take-ons, which means when our attackers are in poor form we can look blunt. We also lack, in my opinion, a universal understanding among the team of where attackers should run in the final third to make space, and we sometimes have issues progressing the ball up the pitch for the same reason.

The above tactical limitations are what our direct rivals for the title this season (Chelsea and City) excel at, and that, in short, is why there are and should be legitimate reservations about Ole's ability to beat those teams to the title. Ole is not a bad coach. You don't get where you are by being a bad coach. He just isn't in the absolute top bracket of coaches; a bracket that in my opinion, only includes five our six managers. The problem is that three of them manage our direct rivals. In almost any other era, I would be supremely confident that Ole could win the league with this team. The problem isn't that he's no good. The problem is that, compared to what we're up against, he may not be quite good enough.

He has other key qualities that may make up for the above coaching limitations. He is, by all accounts, an outstanding man manager (see getting Pogba onside, getting players up for big games during some of our lowest points), and an even better squad builder (like honestly, this team on paper is world class). Will this, with the individual quality of Ronaldo, Pogba, Bruno, Rashford, Greenwood, Varane, Maguire, Shaw, and De Gea, be enough to overcome the above tactical deficiencies and win us the league? That's what the next eight months should tell us.

But to my broader point; stop being a twitter critic; if you want to criticise Ole, introduce a bit of nuance into your analysis. This could apply to a lot of regulars on this thread... on both sides of the debate.

A very good and insightful post.

 

[Withnail]

Remember when he was a PE teacher completely out of his depth who wouldn’t last six months? Now he’s the perfect Glazer stooge good enough to guarantee you top 4 but not good enough to win trophies. He’s also cheating because unlike his predecessors who spent hundreds of millions he hasn’t pissed it up the wall and he keeps making great signings who win him games. What a sneaky cnut he is. I mean at this rate if we give him another few windows we may end up with the best squad of players in Europe…we can’t have that can we?

 

[Raven]

People are free to talk shit but for some reason find it offensive when people call it out. Free speech goes both ways.

For the record, I think Ole's doing a fantastic job and anyone complaining after yesterday is doing nothing but embarrassing themselves.

 

[onetwo3oclock4oclockrock]

Whatever you think about the tactician OGS, he really has done a great job rebuilding this club. And for that he deserves a lot of praise, even from the most fierce Ole outers.
This was our PL squad only two years ago vs Newcastle. It's a world of difference:

Starting:
David De Gea
Diogo Dalot
Axel Tuanzebe
Harry Maguire
Ashley Young
Fred
Scott McTominay
Andreas Pereira
Juan Mata
Daniel James
Marcus Rashford

Bench:
Sergio Romero
Marcos Rojo
Brandon Williams
Angel Gomes
Nemanja Matic
Mason Greenwood
Tahith Chong

 

[Jezpeza]

Yeah pretty much. I said something recently on Twitter about some stats guy (supposedly a Utd fan) who constantly denigrates Utd under Ole for having no plan and our results being unsustainable, that the way he talks about us, you'd be forgiven for thinking that we're Burnley, and not the team who was behind only Man City in points accrued since January 2020, and I think since Ole first joined in his caretaker stint we've been comfortably third on that metric as well, behind only the all conquering Liverpool and City sides.

That alone should tell you that what we're doing under Ole is pretty fecking sustainable, no?

Another corker was this absolute toilet water of a tweet:

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

Like seriously, what does that even mean?

I agree. I think some people pursue rhetoric to a point where they make themselves look like they know less than a 7 year old about football. Its just meaningless and thoughtless buzzwords that people hope they can repeat until its accepted as truth.

If it was all about sticking to a managers gameplan and working as a coached unit why do Burnley not win the premier league every season?

Would a ‘pattern of play’ not just constitute playing the same passing move 8 times a game and become massively easy to predict, play and defend against?

The idea that its completely about coaching and Klopp/Pep would ‘coach’ the current ipswich 11 to the champions league with one or two signings. Ole is cheating and relying on signing good players. Pep totally didnt spend nearly a billion pounds in 5 years. Klopp spent over £500m in 6. You’d think Pep had developed Zabaleta and Kolarov and was still playing them every week the way some go on.

Embarassing for some.

 

[Bilbo]

This is the kind of hyperbole that causes perfectly legitimate debates about Ole and the team's coaching to deteriorate into shouting matches. Can you tone it down please?

Is our current coaching and style of play a little too reliant on the talent and brilliance of individual players? Yes, I think so. But you don't get to second in the league with objectively bad coaching, and there are plenty of examples that show the team has been coached well to do the following:
- Play with a specific style in most games (building from the back, using overlapping fullbacks to create overloads in wide areas, and committing defenders in one-on-one duels to create space);
- Play intricate, one-touch passing to break down a low block (as was seen with Lingard's goal today and multiple goals last season);
- Improve attaching and defending set pieces (only four games in, you can already see a massive difference in both boxes);
- Adapt to games against superior opposition to play highly effective counter-attacking football (see our last three victories against City, and our FA Cup victory against Liverpool last season).

There are obvious weaknesses. We are vulnerable to counter-attacks due to structural issues in midfield, and we do not have a coordinated system of pressing to win the ball back quickly after losing it. We also suffer against low blocks sometimes because of the aforementioned style that encourages one-on-one take-ons, which means when our attackers are in poor form we can look blunt. We also lack, in my opinion, a universal understanding among the team of where attackers should run in the final third to make space, and we sometimes have issues progressing the ball up the pitch for the same reason.

The above tactical limitations are what our direct rivals for the title this season (Chelsea and City) excel at, and that, in short, is why there are and should be legitimate reservations about Ole's ability to beat those teams to the title. Ole is not a bad coach. You don't get where you are by being a bad coach. He just isn't in the absolute top bracket of coaches; a bracket that in my opinion, only includes five our six managers. The problem is that three of them manage our direct rivals. In almost any other era, I would be supremely confident that Ole could win the league with this team. The problem isn't that he's no good. The problem is that, compared to what we're up against, he may not be quite good enough.

He has other key qualities that may make up for the above coaching limitations. He is, by all accounts, an outstanding man manager (see getting Pogba onside, getting players up for big games during some of our lowest points), and an even better squad builder (like honestly, this team on paper is world class). Will this, with the individual quality of Ronaldo, Pogba, Bruno, Rashford, Greenwood, Varane, Maguire, Shaw, and De Gea, be enough to overcome the above tactical deficiencies and win us the league? That's what the next eight months should tell us.

But to my broader point; stop being a twitter critic; if you want to criticise Ole, introduce a bit of nuance into your analysis. This could apply to a lot of regulars on this thread... on both sides of the debate.

Really good post. I wish more people would think about a post before pressing the button. Twitter exists for over the top ranting. It doesnt need to be here

 

[Mr Smith]

Really good post. I wish more people would think about a post before pressing the button. Twitter exists for over the top ranting. It doesnt need to be here

I feel reviewing the newbie system would help. It got loosened up a while ago and I feel there's been somewhat of a deterioration in posting quality since. Having said that, I do think the majority of people hold balanced opinions, but they get shouted down by the people on the extreme ends of the argument. What's more, they label everyone who's not steadfastly in their corner to be against them. I've discussed in the past the virtues of Pochettino vs Ole and was immediately branded a Poch lover and Ole hater, which is not true at all. Likewise, you can defend Ole and get called stupid or blind.

My real worry is that we don't win the league by a narrow margin and the Ole out extremists start saying he's a failure, which would be incredibly unfair. We have to accept that the level of competition in the modern PL is extraordinarily high, and we're fighting against two oil-funded clubs who are remarkably well-run. Lets be real, when Ole was hired on an interim basis we never expected him to get even close to building a team that could challenge for the league. He's already exceeded expectations, and deserves credit for that whether he wins the league or not.

 

[DomesticTadpole]

Think all that is missing from the squad is that midfielder. If we can get that then we should be sorted and with the attacking options be a serious force to be reckoned with.

 

[Halftrack]

That's fine and I agree with you. But are you prepared to engage with the legitimate balanced criticisms rather than just calling out the lunatics? Because that's the only way this debate moves forward.

For my part, I've just gotten to the point where I can't be bothered engaging with most of it. Like the criticism forwarded in here, about Newcastle creating better chances and us misplacing too many passes, where both are demonstrably false. Or the oft repeated claim that Ole gave Jones and Young new contracts (while caretaker), that all players sold during his tenure improved elsewhere (I'm fairly certain only Lukaku did, and even that's debatable), the people who think we dominated every game under Ferguson (or, at least pretend they do in order to criticise Ole), the repeated claims that we have no style, etc. Fair do's to those that still have the energy to try and debunk the same shite over and over again, but theses days I mostly can't be bothered.

"You don't get to"? So I was right, you see yourself needed to defend the forum? Good to know.

A bit ironic, this.

 

[Bilbo]

Would a ‘pattern of play’ not just constitute playing the same passing move 8 times a game and become massively easy to predict, play and defend against?

This is a really key point that so many overlook. There is undoubtedly merit in the way that Pep (for example) has a way that he wants to play and its incredibly difficult to implement that structure, but the flipside to that is that by now everybody knows how to beat City. There is a specific gameplan which works against every football team, but with a team as good as City are very few possess the right tools to get there. Its why they have struggled to win the CL. At the very top level those opponents all have the tools and the know-how and it levels the playing field.

Point being, there are certain advantages to being flexible. United were having a lot of joy in countering opponents, and last season our opponents stopped giving us the space. The result was a bunch of 0-0's against the top 4. We have to do something different, and we've added some tools to our squad this summer. Varane adds pace to the defence, Ronaldo is, well, Ronaldo and Sancho will prove to be a little more delicate around the box than our other wide forwards. What I like most about our squad building is the options it gives us. I dont want United to have a set style of play

 

[rotherham_red]

Are you referring to that Kees guy? He's irritating with his agenda

Yup. That exact one. They're a joyless lot over on that particular corner of football twitter...

 

[BorisManUtd]

Think all that is missing from the squad is that midfielder. If we can get that then we should be sorted and with the attacking options be a serious force to be reckoned with.

Perhaps a right back as well, not sure if Dalot is good enough (we'll see this season though) and AWB can't play all the time. I'd love it if we bought Trippier this summer, think he'd be significant upgrade on AWB when we're attacking.

 

[Adam_S]

Fergie used to set the team up a lot like Ole does. I remember people bitching about how his tactics were too simplistic, especially in Europe. He even brought in Queiroz to help with that one, if you all remember. I also remember people complaining about him playing 4-5-1/4-2-3-1 for what it's worth. The man was an absolute master of man management and recruitment and new how to build a great side.

Is Ole the next Fergie? Well, he's got a few trophies to win before people start making that comparison. Have United won stuff in the past playing the way he's trying to? I'd say they have.

 

[Bilbo]

I feel reviewing the newbie system would help. It got loosened up a while ago and I feel there's been somewhat of a deterioration in posting quality since. Having said that, I do think the majority of people hold balanced opinions, but they get shouted down by the people on the extreme ends of the argument. What's more, they label everyone who's not steadfastly in their corner to be against them. I've discussed in the past the virtues of Pochettino vs Ole and was immediately branded a Poch lover and Ole hater, which is not true at all. Likewise, you can defend Ole and get called stupid or blind.

My real worry is that we don't win the league by a narrow margin and the Ole out extremists start saying he's a failure, which would be incredibly unfair. We have to accept that the level of competition in the modern PL is extraordinarily high, and we're fighting against two oil-funded clubs who are remarkably well-run. Lets be real, when Ole was hired on an interim basis we never expected him to get even close to building a team that could challenge for the league. He's already exceeded expectations, and deserves credit for that whether he wins the league or not.

I couldn't agree more. Its absolutely guaranteed that many of those posters demanding a 'proper title challenge' as a minimum requirement will be the first to call Ole and the team bottlers if we do finish 2 or 3 points away. Rather than be disappointed but understanding and reasonable, for those people it will only enhance the notion that Ole isn't a 'closer' and round and round this conversation will go

 

[AshRK]

People just become over critical of our game and just praise other teams without watching them on a regular basis. Like if anyone had watched the Chelsea game yesterday would tell you Villa literally bossed them in the first half and should have been leading them. Mings gifted them a goal and Villa lost 3-0. But people without watching much will say "look how good tuchel is". Why isn't his wins termed "lucky" or called "individual brilliance".

Always felt people troll Ole to look cool. A narrative has always been made that he cannot coach and is just as a PE teacher. I myself have doubts with Ole and have criticized his tactics but I don't think we will be where we are with someone who doesn't know how to coach. It is just impossible. I hope we win a trophy or two as his work definitely deserves one.

 

[Strelok]

This is the kind of hyperbole that causes perfectly legitimate debates about Ole and the team's coaching to deteriorate into shouting matches. Can you tone it down please?

Is our current coaching and style of play a little too reliant on the talent and brilliance of individual players? Yes, I think so. But you don't get to second in the league with objectively bad coaching, and there are plenty of examples that show the team has been coached well to do the following:
- Play with a specific style in most games (building from the back, using overlapping fullbacks to create overloads in wide areas, and committing defenders in one-on-one duels to create space);
- Play intricate, one-touch passing to break down a low block (as was seen with Lingard's goal today and multiple goals last season);
- Improve attaching and defending set pieces (only four games in, you can already see a massive difference in both boxes);
- Adapt to games against superior opposition to play highly effective counter-attacking football (see our last three victories against City, and our FA Cup victory against Liverpool last season).

There are obvious weaknesses. We are vulnerable to counter-attacks due to structural issues in midfield, and we do not have a coordinated system of pressing to win the ball back quickly after losing it. We also suffer against low blocks sometimes because of the aforementioned style that encourages one-on-one take-ons, which means when our attackers are in poor form we can look blunt. We also lack, in my opinion, a universal understanding among the team of where attackers should run in the final third to make space, and we sometimes have issues progressing the ball up the pitch for the same reason.

The above tactical limitations are what our direct rivals for the title this season (Chelsea and City) excel at, and that, in short, is why there are and should be legitimate reservations about Ole's ability to beat those teams to the title. Ole is not a bad coach. You don't get where you are by being a bad coach. He just isn't in the absolute top bracket of coaches; a bracket that in my opinion, only includes five our six managers. The problem is that three of them manage our direct rivals. In almost any other era, I would be supremely confident that Ole could win the league with this team. The problem isn't that he's no good. The problem is that, compared to what we're up against, he may not be quite good enough.

He has other key qualities that may make up for the above coaching limitations. He is, by all accounts, an outstanding man manager (see getting Pogba onside, getting players up for big games during some of our lowest points), and an even better squad builder (like honestly, this team on paper is world class). Will this, with the individual quality of Ronaldo, Pogba, Bruno, Rashford, Greenwood, Varane, Maguire, Shaw, and De Gea, be enough to overcome the above tactical deficiencies and win us the league? That's what the next eight months should tell us.

But to my broader point; stop being a twitter critic; if you want to criticise Ole, introduce a bit of nuance into your analysis. This could apply to a lot of regulars on this thread... on both sides of the debate.

Very good post.

However the first and second tactical limitation you've mentioned imo might very well is because we don't have a good midfield. We can only be sure why once we buy at least a good CDM I think.

 

[rotherham_red]

I agree. I think some people pursue rhetoric to a point where they make themselves look like they know less than a 7 year old about football. Its just meaningless and thoughtless buzzwords that people hope they can repeat until its accepted as truth.

If it was all about sticking to a managers gameplan and working as a coached unit why do Burnley not win the premier league every season?

Would a ‘pattern of play’ not just constitute playing the same passing move 8 times a game and become massively easy to predict, play and defend against?

The idea that its completely about coaching and Klopp/Pep would ‘coach’ the current ipswich 11 to the champions league with one or two signings. Ole is cheating and relying on signing good players. Pep totally didnt spend nearly a billion pounds in 5 years. Klopp spent over £500m in 6. You’d think Pep had developed Zabaleta and Kolarov and was still playing them every week the way some go on.

Embarassing for some.

Exactly mate. All that gets conveniently ignored.

Ole might not be that guy to win us the title but you know what, as a matchgoing fan who goes home and away, I can tell you this: I've not enjoyed being one as much as I have done under Ole (I never got the chance to experience SAF's Utd teams in the flesh). He brought back what it meant to be a proper Utd side and the way he's methodically rebuilt this side has been beautiful to see. He doesn't ignore the youth like Jose did. He doesn't marginalise his players like LvG and unlike Moyes, he inspires chemistry and a bond between and among his players. He's taken us so far, and even if he doesn't ultimately prove to be the man to win us the big titles, his role in our ascent guarantees that his appointment has been a successful one. I'm obviously hoping he is that guy though, cos the trophies would just be that bit sweeter after all the shit he's taken from the press and basement-dwelling virgins online.

 

[rotherham_red]

People just become over critical of our game and just praise other teams without watching them on a regular basis. Like if anyone had watched the Chelsea game yesterday would tell you Villa literally bossed them in the first half and should have been leading them. Mings gifted them a goal and Villa lost 3-0. But people without watching much will say "look how good tuchel is". Why isn't his wins termed "lucky" or called "individual brilliance".

Always felt people troll Ole to look cool. A narrative has always been made that he cannot coach and is just as a PE teacher. I myself have doubts with Ole and have criticized his tactics but I don't think we will be where we are with someone who doesn't know how to coach. It is just impossible. I hope we win a trophy or two as his work definitely deserves one.

100% I've been waiting for someone to say this but I've yet to see it anywhere.

 

[Robbie Boy]

This is the kind of hyperbole that causes perfectly legitimate debates about Ole and the team's coaching to deteriorate into shouting matches. Can you tone it down please?

Is our current coaching and style of play a little too reliant on the talent and brilliance of individual players? Yes, I think so. But you don't get to second in the league with objectively bad coaching, and there are plenty of examples that show the team has been coached well to do the following:
- Play with a specific style in most games (building from the back, using overlapping fullbacks to create overloads in wide areas, and committing defenders in one-on-one duels to create space);
- Play intricate, one-touch passing to break down a low block (as was seen with Lingard's goal today and multiple goals last season);
- Improve attaching and defending set pieces (only four games in, you can already see a massive difference in both boxes);
- Adapt to games against superior opposition to play highly effective counter-attacking football (see our last three victories against City, and our FA Cup victory against Liverpool last season).

There are obvious weaknesses. We are vulnerable to counter-attacks due to structural issues in midfield, and we do not have a coordinated system of pressing to win the ball back quickly after losing it. We also suffer against low blocks sometimes because of the aforementioned style that encourages one-on-one take-ons, which means when our attackers are in poor form we can look blunt. We also lack, in my opinion, a universal understanding among the team of where attackers should run in the final third to make space, and we sometimes have issues progressing the ball up the pitch for the same reason.

The above tactical limitations are what our direct rivals for the title this season (Chelsea and City) excel at, and that, in short, is why there are and should be legitimate reservations about Ole's ability to beat those teams to the title. Ole is not a bad coach. You don't get where you are by being a bad coach. He just isn't in the absolute top bracket of coaches; a bracket that in my opinion, only includes five our six managers. The problem is that three of them manage our direct rivals. In almost any other era, I would be supremely confident that Ole could win the league with this team. The problem isn't that he's no good. The problem is that, compared to what we're up against, he may not be quite good enough.

He has other key qualities that may make up for the above coaching limitations. He is, by all accounts, an outstanding man manager (see getting Pogba onside, getting players up for big games during some of our lowest points), and an even better squad builder (like honestly, this team on paper is world class). Will this, with the individual quality of Ronaldo, Pogba, Bruno, Rashford, Greenwood, Varane, Maguire, Shaw, and De Gea, be enough to overcome the above tactical deficiencies and win us the league? That's what the next eight months should tell us.

But to my broader point; stop being a twitter critic; if you want to criticise Ole, introduce a bit of nuance into your analysis. This could apply to a lot of regulars on this thread... on both sides of the debate.

Well said.

 

[Adam_S]

Think all that is missing from the squad is that midfielder. If we can get that then we should be sorted and with the attacking options be a serious force to be reckoned with.

Begin the cloning of Roy Keane immediately!

 

[Jezpeza]

I couldn't agree more. Its absolutely guaranteed that many of those posters demanding a 'proper title challenge' as a minimum requirement will be the first to call Ole and the team bottlers if we do finish 2 or 3 points away. Rather than be disappointed but understanding and reasonable, for those people it will only enhance the notion that Ole isn't a 'closer' and round and round this conversation will go

When you look at the managers and squads of us, City, Chelsea and Liverpool, its crazy to think that 3 of those teams will miss out on the title tbf. The standard of the PL is out of this world

 

[Jezpeza]

Exactly mate. All that gets conveniently ignored.

Ole might not be that guy to win us the title but you know what, as a matchgoing fan who goes home and away, I can tell you this: I've not enjoyed being one as much as I have done under Ole (I never got the chance to experience SAF's Utd teams in the flesh). He brought back what it meant to be a proper Utd side and the way he's methodically rebuilt this side has been beautiful to see. He doesn't ignore the youth like Jose did. He doesn't marginalise his players like LvG and unlike Moyes, he inspires chemistry and a bond between and among his players. He's taken us so far, and even if he doesn't ultimately prove to be the man to win us the big titles, his role in our ascent guarantees that his appointment has been a successful one. I'm obviously hoping he is that guy though, cos the trophies would just be that bit sweeter after all the shit he's taken from the press and basement-dwelling virgins online.

Yeah. I enjoy watching us again. I think the squad management has left us with something sustainable and a lot of long term quality players. There havent been any darmian rojo fellaini signings. Feels like there is hope for the future again. There are players like sancho and greenwood who i am looking forward to seeing develop their career in a red shirt. Regardless of who is in charge.

Theres much more to a club than a manager. Also think Some of our fans need to accept we dominated the PL in a 2 horse era. Arsenal dropped away as Chelsea emerged. Its not that easy anymore. We wont win 7 league titles a decade

 

[Leftback99]

Yup. That exact one. They're a joyless lot over on that particular corner of football twitter...

I think some of them are good and offer decent insights however I wonder whether they actually watched and enjoyed football first before they got into statistics. It's always been more about the quality of the players, not a game of chess played by the managers which they want to break it down to.

 

[Bleu]

I am so happy for Ole that I could cry. A great man, he walked into a complete mess, having to resurrect a fallen giant, and by god he has done it. Keep the faith in Ole!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[rotherham_red]

I think some of them are good and offer decent insights however I wonder whether they actually watched and enjoyed football first before they got into statistics. It's always been more about the quality of the players, not a game of chess played by the managers which they want to break it down to.

Yeah some do, maybe even Kees himself does at times as well, but it's the holier than thou sanctimony that really gets under my skin.

I doubt he's ever played the game seriously in his life but because he has access to the basic package on Wyscout or something he thinks he's the equal to a UEFA Pro licenced coach who has spent years in the game around the very best in the sector. Or that his sole analysis and analytics are somehow the equivalent of a club's whole department, despite them being a) 10-50 strong in terms of manpower and b) have a genuine track record of professional excellence.

And that's before we consider that the data available to the club will be on several orders of magnitude more in quality and quantity than what Kees and his ilk have available to them...

 

[DomesticTadpole]

Begin the cloning of Roy Keane immediately!

Wish we could. There must be a mad professor somewhere who is an United fan.

 

[RooneyLegend]

Yeah some do, maybe even Kees himself does at times as well, but it's the holier than thou sanctimony that really gets under my skin.

I doubt he's ever played the game seriously in his life but because he has access to the basic package on Wyscout or something he thinks he's the equal to a UEFA Pro licenced coach who has spent years in the game around the very best in the sector. Or that his sole analysis and analytics are somehow the equivalent of a club's whole department, despite them being a) 10-50 strong in terms of manpower and b) have a genuine track record of professional excellence.

And that's before we consider that the data available to the club will be on several orders of magnitude more in quality and quantity than what Kees and his ilk have available to them...

All clubs have access to all of that and regularly make bad signings and go through terrible periods.

 

[RooneyLegend]

What people ignore is our clubs structure. Here the manager is expected to do everything like in the good old days. The other clubs just hire coaches and give them players. In that sense Ole has embraced everything about his role and is doing well He might have to hire reinforcements for our coachsing staff though, someone from the current Ajax regime would do nicely.

 

[AshRK]

100% I've been waiting for someone to say this but I've yet to see it anywhere.

You won't because that will change people's narrative then.

 

[Bobcat]

This is a really key point that so many overlook. There is undoubtedly merit in the way that Pep (for example) has a way that he wants to play and its incredibly difficult to implement that structure, but the flipside to that is that by now everybody knows how to beat City. There is a specific gameplan which works against every football team, but with a team as good as City are very few possess the right tools to get there. Its why they have struggled to win the CL. At the very top level those opponents all have the tools and the know-how and it levels the playing field.

Point being, there are certain advantages to being flexible. United were having a lot of joy in countering opponents, and last season our opponents stopped giving us the space. The result was a bunch of 0-0's against the top 4. We have to do something different, and we've added some tools to our squad this summer. Varane adds pace to the defence, Ronaldo is, well, Ronaldo and Sancho will prove to be a little more delicate around the box than our other wide forwards. What I like most about our squad building is the options it gives us. I dont want United to have a set style of play

Exactly. I know Ole saying "go out there and have fun" is a bit of a cliche, and some people might take it a bit to far, but there is some truth to it and there is also some merit to that way of playing.

A more structured way of playing or "patterns of play" as everyone is yearning for has its benefits, but so does playing with more freedom, and both of them also has their own drawbacks.

During the LvG years we were very structured, but that did not produce good results or even good football apart from a few notable games. Also, coaches who are very system heavy in their approach often have much stricter requirments on what players they can utillize effectively. Pep for example needs players who are techincally proficient and good with the ball in tight areas. If he tried to do that with Burnely, they would fail spectacularly as you cant play tiki-taka with a bunch of brawny thugs

Being more flexible makes you more unpredicable, and truly creative players really thrive in such systems. The drawback is that you become very dependant on those players, and if they have a bad drop in form or become injured, they are almost impossible to replace and you will struggle badly with creativity

 

[rotherham_red]

All clubs have access to all of that and regularly make bad signings and go through terrible periods.

Yes, and if the geniuses that are the stats gurus on Twitter were any better than them they'd be employed by these football clubs and not be *checks notes* stats gurus on Twitter.

Comprende?

 

[lysglimt]

I agree with you, OGS is doing a lot of things right. But one thing feels a tad questionable - you don't have to get other people, don't you? They maybe don't get you neither, so what meaning does this have. If you read the criticism, nobody complained about the result, but in parts about the performance. I don't agree with that for that game but why shouldn't it be possible to post on a discussion board?

I can understand people without agreeing with them - in some respects. If people say - "I am not convinced Ole will take us to the title". or "I don't think Ole is good enough to dethrone Pep, Klopp or Tuchel." or maybe even "I think we should play more fluent football with the players we have" - fine, I dont have a problem with that. I may not agree with it - but those are criticisms I can understand people have.

The problem is much of the criticism aimed towards Ole has been over the top at best. That he is too nice (a Glazer-stooge), that he is incompetent, that he couldn't attract big players. That we rely on individual talent (a lot of the talent he acquired btw) etc etc

And in a game where we win 4-1 (without Rashford, Cavani, McTominay and with Fred on the bench most likely due to the Covid-situation) as well as Sancho being nowhere near his best - it seems strange to make a big deal out of the fact that our football wasn't breathtaking. I watched Chelsea got torn to shreds in the first half against Villa - and were unfortunate not to be a couple of goals ahead at half-time. Some of these people who criticize Ole after the Newcastle-game, would applaud Tuchel for being tactical, and a winner.

But does it really matter if you win due to a well-oiled team, compared to a team that is so stocked with individual quality that they win big even on an off-day ?

I think of it as like this - with Sancho being really poor, with Rashford out, with no central midfield - we still destroyed Newcastle, despite not playing well. Imagine how much potential there is in that team when we are at our strongest. Complain when things dont go well, dont do it when we win by 4-1

 

[RooneyLegend]

Yes, and if the geniuses that are the stats gurus on Twitter were any better than them they'd be employed by these football clubs and not be *checks notes* stats gurus on Twitter.

Comprende?

Nope, dont buy it, clubs are far from well run and using the way the operate as any example for anything is not the way to go. Id mtrust my own eyes long before i trust those scouting networks.

Im not saying some stats guru on twitter would do better, what im saying is you cant invalidate someones opinion on the basis of how clubs are run given how so many clubs underperform on a regular basis.

 

[Skåre Willoch]

Best manager in the Prem

 

[The United]

IF Ole ever wins the league ahead of those 3 managers, it will be like individual brilliance won it, not Ole!

And, I would thank Ole for signing individual brilliance.

 

[OleBoiii]

IF Ole ever wins the league ahead of those 3 managers, it will be like individual brilliance won it, not Ole!

 

[Skeezix]

Building a squad takes time. We've seen improvements over Ole's tenure. Trophies will come no doubt. Just a matter of when not if.

Those who doubt his managerial acumen should compare him with the likes of Lampard, Arteta, Pirlo and the likes.

 

[Oranges038]

Exactly. I know Ole saying "go out there and have fun" is a bit of a cliche, and some people might take it a bit to far, but there is some truth to it and there is also some merit to that way of playing.

A more structured way of playing or "patterns of play" as everyone is yearning for has its benefits, but so does playing with more freedom, and both of them also has their own drawbacks.

During the LvG years we were very structured, but that did not produce good results or even good football apart from a few notable games. Also, coaches who are very system heavy in their approach often have much stricter requirments on what players they can utillize effectively. Pep for example needs players who are techincally proficient and good with the ball in tight areas. If he tried to do that with Burnely, they would fail spectacularly as you cant play tiki-taka with a bunch of brawny thugs

Being more flexible makes you more unpredicable, and truly creative players really thrive in such systems. The drawback is that you become very dependant on those players, and if they have a bad drop in form or become injured, they are almost impossible to replace and you will struggle badly with creativity

What do people who go on about patterns of play really want? Do they really just want predictability and an assurance that they may know what is going to happen next.

I find teams that play patterns designed to the process or the system incredibly boring and predictable and it being mostly predictable is what makes it boring to me. It's more boring than watching a team just lump it long, that's still a system and a process and there is a pattern to it. I genuinely found peak Spain and Barcelona incredibly boring to watch.

I don't understand why so many people seem to want this so badly. You end up watching a team try the same thing over and over and over until it pays off. Then you get a goal and go back to trying the same patterns over and over and over again.

 

[Sylar]

Ronaldos goal came after Masons shot. The other chances were unlikely goals, half chances. Creating something dangerous is an issue we have and had for a long time. We tend to struggle against these teams, more than against the big teams. Southampten and Wolves were no different

Sure, I get what youre saying, but its a bizarre point when youre using yesterdays game to illustrate it, given we scored 4, and could / should have had a penalty for Sanchos shot being blocked by a hand, Varane had a free header he put wide.

You said we were all over the place in the first half, which is not accurate at all. Sometimes these games need patience when you dont score in the first ten minutes to open up the game. And our patience was rewarded.

 

[AjaxCunian]

This is a really key point that so many overlook. There is undoubtedly merit in the way that Pep (for example) has a way that he wants to play and its incredibly difficult to implement that structure, but the flipside to that is that by now everybody knows how to beat City. There is a specific gameplan which works against every football team, but with a team as good as City are very few possess the right tools to get there. Its why they have struggled to win the CL. At the very top level those opponents all have the tools and the know-how and it levels the playing field.

Point being, there are certain advantages to being flexible. United were having a lot of joy in countering opponents, and last season our opponents stopped giving us the space. The result was a bunch of 0-0's against the top 4. We have to do something different, and we've added some tools to our squad this summer. Varane adds pace to the defence, Ronaldo is, well, Ronaldo and Sancho will prove to be a little more delicate around the box than our other wide forwards. What I like most about our squad building is the options it gives us. I dont want United to have a set style of play

Haven't teams with a set style of play not far more often won the CL than not over the past 10 years? If you think of Barcelona, Liverpool, Chelsea, Real, Bayern.